Qiao v. Chang CA4/2

California Court of Appeal Feb 5, 2026 No. E085692Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the trial court's order awarding attorney fees to the respondents, holding that the appellant failed to provide adequate legal authority or reasoned argument to demonstrate error.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in awarding attorney fees to the respondents.
Whether the appellant met the burden of demonstrating error on appeal.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“A judgment or order of a lower court is presumed to be correct on appeal, and all intendments and presumptions are indulged in favor of its correctness.”

“Plaintiff seeks reversal of the trial court’s order granting attorney fees to Respondents, but his brief lacks adequate legal authority and analysis showing how the court erred.”

“The order granting attorney fees is affirmed.”

Filed 2/5/26 Qiao v. Chang CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

XINGWANG QIAO,

Plaintiff and Appellant, E085692

v. (Super.Ct.No. RIC1901678)

QILIN CHANG, et al., OPINION

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Lydia Villarreal* and John

D. Molloy, Judges. Affirmed.

Xingwang Qiao, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Stinson LLP and Jan T. Chilton, for Defendants and Respondents.

Following a court trial on plaintiff and appellant Xingwang Qiao’s (Plaintiff)

claims for gross negligence, declaratory relief, conversion, and unjust enrichment against

* Retired Judge of the Monterey Superior Court assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

defendants and respondents Qilin Chang, Golden Taste LLC, Golden Globe LP, and

Worlden San Bernardino, Inc. (Respondents), judgment was entered in favor of

Respondents. Subsequently, the trial court awarded $45,353 in costs and $552,940 in

attorney fees to Respondents. On appeal, Plaintiff requests this court invalidate the award

Qiao v. Chang CA4/2

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

XINGWANG QIAO,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

II. DISCUSSION

III. DISPOSITION

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

RAMIREZ P. J.

MILLER J.

AI Brief